It had been some time since the BikeDC world heard from hater of bicycles in the road and WaPo columnist Courtland Milloy, but it appears he has lost nothing during his long slumber in the sewers beneath Derry, Maine.

If you've been around awhile you remember that back in 2014 he called cyclist "bullies", "ninjas" and "terrorists" in a rambling, pointless and poorly researched article in DC's paper of record. For this, he earned much flack leading him to - shockingly - go on a bike ride from which he learned nothing. In the follow up article he wrote "in this bike-friendly city, the driver is always wrong" and he called "taking the lane" "impeding traffic". So, yeah that worked. He called for courtesy from cyclists, which he defined as getting out of the way of cars, but none from drivers. And his friend Colbert King got in on it, complaining that cyclists can't take a joke, and then also calling us terrorists - get it?

But his complaining about bicyclists goes back well before 2014. Back in 1988, in an article about the driving test in DC, he was complaining about bicyclists in the road and that they don't pay registration or need to be inspected.

There is a bike path alongside the roadway, yet there is a cyclist in front of you using the road instead of the path. You should: (a) honk at the cyclist and point to the path; (b) notify a policeman; (c) treat the cyclist as you would any other vehicle, since a cyclist is allowed to use either the roadway or the bike path.

The answer is (c), although there is some disagreement as to whether this means you can take your pickup truck onto the bike path.

One of the downsides of bicycling, however, is safety. Nationally, about 500,000 bicyclists crash their way into hospital emergency rooms each year. Some end up losing feet, hands and other body parts. There are roughly 500 to 1,000 fatalities each year, almost all of them involving bicyclists and automobiles.

Instructed by the police officer to get off the sidewalk and into the street, I took a deep breath and began to look for an opening in the traffic. The closer I got to the curb, however, the faster the cars and trucks seemed to be going. Not one driver acted like he even saw me.

But in 2014 he wasn't done. The following January he weighed in again after a pair of cyclist fatalities, arguing not that the problem wasn't bad drivers (the first cyclist was killed by a repeat drunk driver) but rather the very presence of bikes in the road. [If there's one theme, it's that he thinks bikes don't belong in the road]. The thing about that article, that cyclists need their own space, is not TOO far from what bike advocates want,

What cyclists need is a separate network of biking roads, not bike lanes. Give them trails through wooded areas, away from cars and trucks. Once they enter high-traffic areas in the city, it’s off the bicycle and onto alternative transportation. Like two feet.

Which brings us to his latest essay. For this one he uses an extreme example of bad cyclists behavior, perhaps the worst since Alejandro Jose Grant shot and killed a driver after she bumped him with her car.

According to D.C. police, the motorist — Kethezo Paho, 34, of Bethesda — was heading west on M Street NW in Georgetown last week when he came upon the bicyclist — Maxim Smith, 24, of Northwest. D.C. police said Paho became angry that Smith was riding slowly and blew his horn to get the cyclist to move over. But Smith apparently stayed his course.

when Paho tried to pass Smith on M Street. According to police, the cyclist reached out and hit the car. He was charged with destruction of property.

Paho then stopped his car and threatened to call police to report the damage. As Smith tried to pedal away, Paho grabbed the bike. Smith then repeatedly called the driver the racial slur, police said, and struck him in the head with a heavy metal U-shaped bicycle lock.

Yep. That's some illegal and reprehensible behavior no doubt. There were a lot of mistakes made and most of them, and the worst of them, by Smith.

At last report, Smith had been released into home detention. We'll see if he gets charged with a hate crime, but even if not, he's in some serious legal trouble and for good reason. If you want my advice, don't escalate things with drivers. And don't call anyone racial slurs. And don't hit anyone or their car with your bike lock unless your life is at risk. End advice.

But Milloy's not really interested in the violence or the racial aspects. He wants to talk about what started this all, and that's the damn cyclist being in the road in the first place. What's up with that?

Paho became angry that Smith was riding slowly and blew his horn to get the cyclist to move over. But Smith apparently stayed his course.

This is a common scenario, and the cause of considerable aggravation for both motorist and cyclist.

Yes. Having drivers blow their horns at me for riding in the road does aggravate me.

At issue is a D.C. law that says: “A bicyclist riding on a highway shall not unduly or unnecessarily impede or obstruct traffic.”

Problem is, the meaning of “unduly” and “unnecessarily” seems to depend on whether you are behind a steering wheel or a set of handlebars.

No, it literally doesn't. Perspective is irrelevant. And riding in the road at the normal speed of a bike is not unduly or unnecessarily impeding. Blocking someone from a gas station is.

"If a bicyclist is going 10 to 12 miles an hour in a 25 mile an hour zone, that’s not obstruction,” Billing said. “They are just moving a bit slower.”

More like a whole lot slower from where I sit behind a steering wheel.

OK, but be a grown up, and just deal with it.

Driving through Rock Creek Park recently, I came upon a caravan of cars creeping behind a bicyclist who was riding in the middle of the lane. My speedometer fluctuated between zero and 5 miles an hour, stop and go.

My BS detector is going off. Between 0 and 5? Stop and go? That doesn't sound like a cyclist-caused slow down.

Why do some cyclists refuse to move out of the way and allow cars to pass?

One possible answer is that the law doesn’t require them to move over. No more than the law prohibits motorists from hanging out in the left hand lane of a major highway, while traffic backs up for miles. But moving would be the considerate thing to do.

Sigh. On Beach Drive, where exactly does one go to "Get out of the way"?

The average traffic lane in the District is about 11 feet wide. The average car is less than six feet wide. All a cyclist needs to do is move over a few feet, and a motorist could pass with plenty of room to spare.

But no.

Moving over to the right can be more dangerous. He said so himself back in 1998. Remember? "The closer I got to the curb, however, the faster the cars and trucks seemed to be going. Not one driver acted like he even saw me." So that's why cyclists don't move over, because there are enough drivers who suck to make it dangerous.

In other words, don’t use your horn to warn the wayward cyclist that you are about to pass. Wait until he comes after you with a bicycle lock?

Yes, because those are the only two options. We all know that any driver who passes a cyclist without honking their horn gets a taste of the business end of a bike lock. And why is he "wayward"?

Billing pointed out that it’s against the law for a motorist to pass within three feet of a cyclist. He questioned whether Smith would have been able to reach out and hit the car if Paho had been the required distance away. But cyclists are notorious for passing within inches of a car, especially when rushing to get in front of cars stopped at a red light.

Whataboutism.

You have to wonder: With so many convoluted laws and hazardous conditions, maybe bicycles just don’t belong on the streets with cars.

Only Milloy has to wonder that. You know what I wonder? How can someone be thinking about this - bikes in the street - for so long and yet never get any smarter about it?

Dana Milbank thinks a ban on driving while talking on the phone is "an absurd overreaction to an unrelated problem." And he cherry picks a part of a sentence from the Brain Research study to say that they don't know if talking on the cellphone while driving is more distracting than "listening to a radio, eating and drinking, monitoring children or pets, or even conversing with a passenger." The full quote is more revealing (emphasis mine). "it is incorrect to conclude that using a cell phone while driving is no worse than engaging in one of these other activities. First, it is not known exactly how much each of these distractions affects driving, and it may indeed be interesting and important to compare the various effects, and try to find ways to decrease their negative impacts. Second, talking on a cell phone has a special social demand, such that not attending to the cell conversation can be interpreted as rude, insulting behavior. By contrast, a passenger who is a conversation partner is more likely to be aware of the competing demands for a driver's attention and thus sympathetic to inattention to the conversation, and indeed there is recent experimental evidence suggesting that passengers and drivers suppress conversation in response to driving demands (Crundall et al., 2005). Third, the processing of spoken language has a special status by virtue of its automaticity, such that one cannot willfully stop one's processing of a spoken utterance (Newman et al., 2007), whereas one can willfully stop tuning a radio. These various considerations suggest that engaging in conversation while concurrently driving can be a risky choice, not just for commonsense reasons, but because of the compromised performance imposed by cognitive and neural constraints.

Use a U-Lock signage. Needed at many local universities and Metro stations.

‘Tis the Season to Help Motorists and Cyclists: A “Change Lanes and Pass” Rule

I am thankful for all the polite drivers who wait behind me as I ride on two-lane MD-953, which has double yellow (no passing) lines the whole way.I am usually in the center of the 10-ft lane, pulling a trailer with my daughter.Even when I don’t have the trailer, 95% of the drivers wait until the oncoming lane is clear, change lanes, and pass (unless I'm on skates).And when I am riding toward the right side of the lane for some reason, the vast majority still change lanes to pass.

Countless drivers have probably done you the same favor on another road.But they are breaking the law.

So in the spirit of the season, what might we give back to all of those nice drivers? I think Maryland should legalize changing lanes to pass a bike riding in a no-passing zone.[1]Not only are these drivers being safe, they actually enhance safety. [2]

The Golden Rule is the most fundamental guideline to vehicular transportation. On this blog we have discussed many “rules of the road” that make sense for motor vehicles, but that do not enhance safety when applied to bicycles.We would love to see those laws reformed.But we often lack the political power to make it happen. Let's treat drivers how we would have them treat us.We probably do have the political power to secure for motorists the right to change lanes and pass a bike when there is a double yellow line.I think we should.And if we do it right, it might encourage “good will toward men” [and women] on bikes.[3]

The Scrooge in me says “Let’s Not Go Too Far”: The “Partly-Cross-the-Line and Pass” Rule

Until last week, I thought that I had come up with the perfect gift to the motoring public.The motorists would like it and we should like giving it.But then some friends suggested an even bigger gift, which is making me feel like Scrooge in comparison. They're giving my gift—and then some.

Their idea is to allow drivers to cross the double yellow line to pass bikes, without the requirement to change lanes.This “partly-cross-the-line-and-pass” rule seems to be motivated by the observation that some cyclists ride far enough to the right so that a car barely has enough room to squeeze between the bike and the yellow line, and some drivers try to thread that needle.This rule would allow motorists to move into the adjacent lane by whatever distance makes the driver feel safe, to pass the cyclist in this case.

I’m sure that the proposal would help with drivers who would like to pass with a safe distance, but feel that it is even more important to not wait for a safe opportunity to pass and to stay right of the yellow line. But I am afraid that in more cases, this rule would make cyclists less safe without significantly helping motorists:

1. The drivers at which "partly cross the line and pass" is aimed are more likely to drive safely if they change lanes and pass. Motorists frequently report difficulty in gauging the three feet of space they are required to leave when passing, so why not apply the normal requirement that motorists change lanes? That is an existing behavior with clear rules and expectations; and it's easier to do.There is no need to encourage drivers to pass while occupying parts of two lanes.

2. The State of Maryland will soon start erecting signs that say “Bicycles May Use Full Lane”.I think that “change lanes and pass” better reinforces the message of those signs. Partly crossing the line and sharing a narrow lane actually contradicts that message.

3.Finally, the requirement to change lanes before passing would better discourage “squeezing” between a cyclist and an oncoming motorist, while partly cross the line and pass might encourage such squeezing.

We do not know all of the impacts of these two approaches. (I can think of a few roads where partly crossing the line to pass would not bother me.[4])But even change lanes and pass is a significant change in the law.If it proves to be too little we can come back and further liberalize the passing rule. (Legislators will always go along when cyclists ask them to give motorists rights that potentially imperil no one but cyclists.)

It would be more prudent to take the smaller step first, and see how it goes.

When you buy a child a toy, don’t you take a pass on some of the accessories, at least for this year?

(Jim Titus is a member of WABA's Board of Directors from Prince Georges County. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of WABA. See the WABA blog for a post that does represent WABA's view on the same topic.)

Bicyclists need to stay off the roadway and ride on the sidewalk where they belong.

If bicyclists want respect, they need to show respect and follow the rules of the road.

Bicyclists’ perspective:

Bicycles are vehicles – just like cars, motorcycles and trucks. I have the right to ride on the road.

The "Share the Road" sign means it’s okay for me to ride on roads. Vehicles are supposed to make room for me.

These articles come on the heels of a heavily criticized blog post by DOT Secretary Ray Lahood announcing a collaboration between NHTSA and AAA on National Bike Safety Month, which ignored most key points of safe cycling while recycling old canards. Apparently they listened to the feedback posted on the DOT web site.

(Jim Titus is a member of WABA's Board of Directors from Prince Georges County. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily represent the official view of WABA.)

It looked like the Masters was going to be exciting, but then it wasn't.

Good news, HB363 made it to the Senate floor with only a minor change. It still needs to be approved there and then back in the House to become law - and all by the end of the day. "Surprisingly, there are still some people who don’t want the law and they are lobbying hard, so we are asking everyone affected to contact their groups to generate support emails to their senators."

At least one Capital Bikeshare employee is saying that alta's VP took a trip to the Bahamas with company/DDOT money shortly after operations started, but that now they're forcing some employees to become part time (32 hours a week) instead of full time (as they promised) so that they can deny them health care and paid vacation. Welcome aboard Eric Gilliland.... (tip)

Keith Berner is back, and you may not like this. You should read the last part first, but still..."The cycling community is very tight-knit, hypersensitive to insult or incursion, resistant to giving benefit-of-the-doubt to drivers, and so intensely ideological as to be unable to separate friends from enemies: if you are in a car, you’re bad; if you’re on a bike, you’re good." But then contradicts this with "Just the same, I think reasonable cyclists and reasonable drivers could come together to find ways to reduce inbred hostility and to recognize that at least some of the warfare going on is due to misunderstanding and ignorance, as opposed to ill will." Either we're all unreasonable or we're not. It can't be both. I also think he's wrong about this "Many cyclists seem unwilling to consider the possibility of flaw among their own, just as they seem unwilling to accept any driver as a potential ally." Cyclists constantly find flaw among their own - bring up sidewalk cycling sometime - and often talk about how most drivers are polite and Conscientious, but for a few bad apples. But in this case, he's asking us to accept that the cyclist faked a collision with the car, which the cyclist denies. The "innocent until proven guilty" rule as well as the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" rule both work against Berner in this case. Anyway, he sounds generally interested in getting along and being safe, so I don't want to beat him up here, it's just not as "let's all put this behind us" as I'd like. I suspect more angry email is heading his way.

Marshall Brown, a longtime D.C. campaign strategist whose son Kwame is the council chairman, worries that the shift in population will result in a racially polarized electorate. “The longtime white population, the people who got involved in statehood, civil rights and environmental causes, thought of this as a black city,” said Brown, who is black. “But the new white voters aren’t involved like that. They want doggie parks and bike lanes. The result is a lot of tension.

“The new people believe more in their dogs than they do in people. They go into their little cafes, go out and throw their snowballs. This is not the District I knew. There’s no relationship with the black community; they don’t connect at church, they don’t go to the same cafes, they don’t volunteer in the neighborhood school, and a lot of longtime black residents feel threatened.”

Keith Berner, who writes a blog called Left-Hand View that is part of the Post's local blog network, was recently involved in a confrontation with a cyclist. Right off the bat, he's kind of offtrack when he entitles the post "Bike assaults car". Now, I'd pay good money to see something like that (you know PETA would shut it down) but I'm pretty sure that's impossible. But it gives a good idea of how he sees things.

I was driving along River Road this evening when I rolled to a stop at an intersection where a bicycle was waiting for the light to change. I was in the middle of my lane – the rightmost through lane — and the bicycle was partway into the lane. There was plenty of room to its right, in an unoccupied right-turn-only lane.

Here again, he sees "a bicycle" and what was to "its" right. Was this bicycle lying in the street? And he seems miffed that the cyclists was not in the right-turn only lane, even though the cyclist wasn't turning right and so it would be illegal to be in that lane.

The bicyclist started pounding on my window and screaming that I had come closer to him than permitted by law. I was taken aback by his fury, but didn’t engage. Nonetheless, his message had sunk and, as I approached the next intersection, I was as far left as I could go, with my tires just about touching the dotted white line. The bicyclist had also moved leftward, well into the lane. As I stopped, he threw his bike against my car and started screaming that I had hit him.

Sigh, I want to take Berner's side because I'm not a fan of pounding or screaming, but when the cyclist moves left to take the lane (something I do when I feel like my kindness is not returned) Berner misses the message and pulls up beside him again, instead of waiting behind him. But Berner, I guess, doesn't get that he is supposed to stop behind the cyclist. I'm sympathetic to the fact that he's ignorant, not malicious. And then in does sound like the cyclist goes berserk on him - something I'm also not a fan of (though, I've Hulked out a time or two myself).

Anyway Berner gets out of the car, there is some shouting, Berner shoves the cyclist and the cyclist ends up throwing Berner onto the hood of the car and then onto the pavement. A woman threatens to call the police, Berner decides to leave, the cyclist blocks his path for a few minutes and then it's over, leaving Berner feeling very shaken and dismayed.

So Berner (who is a cyclist himself he notes, the equivalent of "some of my best friends are black") is a bad driver, but not a bad person who had a cyclist lose his cool with him - the shoving we are led to believe was self-defense. This is a story that probably plays out, to some degree, daily in the metropolitan area. It is not the high point of civilization, but its not the end of times either. It's more the byproduct of current road design.

At least, that's how Berner tells it. Someone claiming to be the cyclist has a different take.

Mr. Berner, you were wrong, from start to finish.I obeyed the law at every single point here. I stopped in the right half of the through lane of traffic. It would have been unsafe for me to pull out of the travel lane and into a lane that ended in a few feet, nor does the law require it.

I did not bang on the window to let you know you were closer than the law permitted, for the simple reason that the window was open. And I was not hostile, as your wife well knows. I simply moved up and out of your way, avoiding confrontation. I know many people are not aware that DC and Maryland law require a motorist leave 3 feet of separation when overtaking or passing a bike, so there’s no point getting snippy about it.

You chose to harass me at that point, for reasons known only to you, by pulling up alongside, again, inches away from me, only now you knew you were breaking the law. I did shout at you–being put in physical danger tends to do that to me–and I moved out a little, and paid the price. I bumped you and I fell.

You got out of the car, I didn’t approach it. You screamed obscenities. You shoved me. Did I give as good as I got? Yes. But you started it at each point.

I feel bad for your wife. She clearly suffered, and I’d like to apologize to her. But you, sir, are a bully and a menace, and had the cops showed up as I’d asked, I’d have pressed charges.

So what we got here is an old fashioned "He said, bike said." My first grade teacher Ms. Shaw would make them hold hands throughout recess.

But the only things they both agree on is that Berner twice pulled up too close to the cyclist, and that Berner initiated physical contact. I don't think it's bias that makes me lay the blame in Berner's corner.

"Jack Sullivan, 4300 Ivanhoe Place, requested that Council use caution when expending City funds to institute the Capitol BikeShare program. Mr. Sullivan noted that even though the program would initially be funded by a TIGER Grant from the U. S. Department of Transportation, the City would be committed to a 20% match and would be picking up the cost for the program in the future indefinitely. Mr. Sullivan suggested that the City instead invest in improving the current and potential bike routes in the City, creating less hassle for all riders." Alexandria is not using TIGER funding.

"Poul Hertel, 1217 Michigan Court, spoke about the cost benefit of instituting the Capitol BikeShare program in the City of Alexandria and gave Council a cost benefit analysis of the program. Mr. Hertel requested that COG explore the program further before instituting the program." Not sure what that analysis included or why it would be more accurate than COG's which showed the benefit far exceeded the cost.

"Cyclists passing thru Ft. Myer: do NOT climb the fence to get around Wright Gate. When caught, you will be prosecuted"

Another sign of spring - anti-cyclist letters to the editor "I was astonished and appalled at the number of bicyclists who flew around me, almost none of whom gave any kind of warning." The only commenter (as of this writing) notes that everyone can do more to keep the trails safe.

The Sun Gazette thinks 300 bike parking spaces is too many at Wakefield High School "We’re dubious that even a fraction of those spaces will find themselves filled on any given day, once the new school is constructed. Cut out (or print out) this item and save it for 2013 or 2014, when the new school will be up and running. We’ll see how this prediction turns out." OK, I choose Bike and Walk to School Day, 2014. Already on my calendar. [Wakefield H.S. students and faculty, I'm counting on you].

We've had some nice weather this week. I was biking in short sleeves on Monday.

And that nice weather resulted in higher trail use, according to counts from the Custis Trail.

The CCT's River Road trail plaza seems like, after a decade of false starts, it is finally ready to break ground. "The project is estimated to cost up $150,000 and the coalition has committed $75,000, Tripp said. The other half of the money will be raised from donors....An adjacent business owner offered to fund improvements to the trail near River Road in exchange for free parking on the county-owned land, Gray said. The owner never followed through with his offer and has since relocated his business.....Once a stormwater management permit is obtained, a hearing with the Planning Board will be scheduled."

WABA Board Member Mark Blacknell writes about the importance of sharing the road. "You know that’s who’s in the car behind you, the bike next to you, or crossing the street in front of you, right? A human being. It could be your neighbor, your lawyer, or the guy that makes your sandwiches at lunch."

When the ICC opens, it will include a section of trail according to Melinda Peters, ICC Director. I'm guessing it's the 3.3 miles of "path" in Contract A or the "2.7 miles of new bike paths, with additional bike facilities located along MD 182 that will improve access to Layhill Local Park and Northwest Branch Parks." in Contract B. Has anyone seen this trail/path or been on it? We should go and ride it on opening day.